SCOTUS has unequivocally held that any grounds may be used for immigration bans

With due respect to my colleague Jonathan Keiler, it appears he may have misunderstood U.S. constitutional law when stating the following: Nobody expects a president to be a constitutional scholar. If our current chief executive is any guide it ought to be considered disqualifying – though Obama's claims to constitutional knowledge and scholarship are actually much thinner than the parchment upon which that document is written.  So Donald Trump's lack of constitutional erudition is not in itself terribly disturbing. What's more problematic is his seeming lack of interest in the topic, and as is the case in other areas, a stubborn unwillingness to learn. Trump, on the other hand, has been winging it successfully so far, at least as a political matter, but this trait is coming back to bite him, as it did recently on the issues of guns and Muslims[.] Banning Muslim immigrants logically ought to reduce the risk of such terrorism. However, it is a...(Read Full Post)